Persuasive Essay On Unjust

The jury system of a trial is an essential element of the democratic process. It attempts to secure fairness in the justice system. Traditionally, the jury system has been viewed as a cornerstone of common law procedure. However, the use of the system of trial by jury is on the decline. Today, its use differs, depending on whether (a) it is a civil or criminal matter, and (b) in criminal matters, whether it is a summary or an indictable offence.

In the movie 12 Angry Men, the jurors are set in a hot jury room while they are trying to determine the verdict of a young man who is accused of committing a murder. The jurors all explain why they think the accused is guilty or not guilty. Throughout the movie they are debating back and forth and the reader begins to realize that even though the jurors should try to not let bias cloud their judgement, the majority of the jurors are blinded by bias. The viewer can also see that the jurors have their own distinguishable personalities. Their personalities intertwine with each other to demonstrate how the jury system is flawed, but that is what makes it work.

In chapter 8 of Adam Benforado Unfair, Benforado explains how a judge’s mind can be effected from a bias perspective. There are two types of judge’s, an umpire judge who calls cases as they are through his little black book of rules, and a regular judge who bases their cases off of personal experiences and have clouded minds making mistakes that those who work in the Supreme Court do not notice. If data had been collected from jury trials, hidden biases would have been uncovered sooner but not that biases are visible in our court system, changes need to be made. Benforado makes it clear that questions arise for judges such as how does one know for sure where bail should be set, whether a photograph of the defendant is unfairly prejudicial,

For those who do make it to trial a crucial step to having a fair trial is to have an unbiased jury, before the trial begins the prosecutor, judge, and defense attorney interview members of the jury pool in a process called voir dire. During voir dire the attorneys are given an unlimited amount of challenges for cause, which helps eliminate people who show a bias for one side or the other, for example the defendant’s sibling would not be allowed to serve on the jury because they are too closely related and would have a

Social justice is the fair and proper law that shows everybody is equal regardless of their color, race, gender, religion, etc. The thought of executing another human being is completely harsh! My whole life I have been thought that killing is wrong and that no human being has the right to kill another induvial. To my surprise, it’s what’s happening in our society every day. Giving the death penalty, has no justification. It’s another crime being committed, but this time by the government. The death penalty is usually given to a person that’s found guilty of a capital crime. However, it’s not easy to consider the death penalty as an easy way to punish the guilty. Though many people believe that the death penalty is the right way to punish people that has done hideous crimes, it’s possible to kill an innocent person, citizens pay million for the death penalty, and people of color are more likely to be given capital punishment. The death penalty is a violation of human rights and it should be abolished.

This process not only ensures due process, but it also provides the best means of ensuring an impartial jury. The process provides lawyers the opportunity to review possible jurors and gives them the opportunity to have a say in the selection process. Any jurors that the lawyers feel can be detrimental to the case, can be removed from the jury selection process.

The goal of the American Justice system is to remain unbiased. One way we can achieve unbiased justice is through the jury system. When you are selected for jury service, you must plead to only judge the case based on information presented in court. Judges also appoint jurors who have not formed or expressed opinions about the case (document f).

On one hand many critics argue that the American jury system is no longer a good idea. On the other hand, some may disagree and say the American jury system is still a good idea. According to this view, one can readily agree that the American jury system gives the people a say in what is relevant to today. “The role of jury service in promoting self-governance and civic participation...the United States Constitution viewed jury service as a critically important feature of self-governance and enshrined [guaranteed] the right to serve on juries in the Seventh Amendment” (Document C). While the essence of John Weiser is that the jury system promotes civic participation, such a stance is invalid because their judgement can be clouded. Therefore, even though the American jury system does have its benefits, the jurors choice whether the convicted should be punished can be

Juries exists in the criminal trial to listen to the case presented to them and, as a third, non-bias party, decide beyond reasonable doubt if the accused is guilty. For the use of a trial by juror to be effective, no bias should exists in the jurors judgments, the jurors should understand clearly their role and key legal terms, and the jury system should represent the communities standards and views whilst upholding the rights of the accused and society and remain cost and time effective.

In the Canadian Charters of Rights and Freedoms (1982) under section 11, it is stated that a person that has been charged with a criminal offence, has the right to a trial by jury. For many years jury trials have been under constant criticism in regards to the jury’s inability to adequately perform the responsibilities entrusted to them. Many studies have been performed looking into the jury selection process, jury bias, pre-trial publicity exposure and attitudes/personality of a juror, in order to increase the jury’s abilities to perform their responsibilities to present a fair trial. In the case People v. Weatherton (2014), the inappropriate behaviour of a jury member lead to a legal dispute regarding the final verdict. This behaviour lead to a lengthy investigation with the final decision, made by the Supreme Court of California, to reverse the guilty verdict. As a member of the jury, it is important to understand the responsibilities one must uphold while deciding whether a person is guilty or not guilty.

There are many court cases that have had issues regarding an impartial trial and that has led to something called a Batson Challenge. A Batson Challenge is an objection to the validity of a peremptory challenge, on grounds that the other party used to exclude a potential juror based on race, ethnicity, or sex (www.law.cornell.edu/batsonchallenge). Three are three steps to a Batson Challenge. First, the defendant must show sufficient

Juries allow and force the public to have a personal knowledge of court proceedings, protect against the bias of a single person, and provide the public with certainty that there is not corruption in our judicial system. No human system of justice is perfect, but I believe that what Benjamin Franklin said regarding the Constitution also applies to our jury system, “It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does” (Benjamin Franklin to the Federal Convention).

fairness in the judicial process of course, a jury alone does not guarantee a fair and impartial trial.

I believe that the statements and ideas listed herein this quote, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (Martin Luther King Jr.) relates to how if one country is allowed to abuse, mistreat and terrorize their citizens that countries all over the world will fall like a domino and will eventually allow themselves to give similar treatment to their countries. I understand this quote as being a statement given by Martin Luther King Jr. against communism, fascism, civil rights abuses and unjust treatment in general because of the brutal and horrible lives that some people during his time had to experience and suffer under. The quote also states that injustice to any person of this planet is wrong and that regardless of rhyme or

The right to a trial by jury is a core element of the United States Criminal Justice System. This right is guaranteed to all citizens by the highest law of the land: The United States Constitution. But are juries truly an effective means of securing justice? The movie 12 Angry Men provides commentary on this question with its portrayal of twelve jurors deliberating over a murder case. The jury initially seems bound to condemn the defendant, a young man of nineteen years, to the electric chair, but a single man, Juror no. 8 descents against the majority. Over the course of the film, tensions rise, and after much debate Juror no. 8 manages to convince the other eleven jurors to eventually vote not guilty. Through their debates and casual side conversations, we are shown the role of personal biases and group manipulation tactics that can impede with objective analysis and ultimately the attainment of justice. Thus, the Movie 12 Angry Men mostly serves to challenge the jury system as a means of securing justice by demonstrating the harmful effects of personal biases, the lack of dedication to the system, and the potential for manipulative tactics.